ACS:Law copyright file sharing claims, Gallant Macmillan - and probably some others along the way...

[cashins]

Eould be grateful for any advice, if anyone thinks ive gone a little too far etc

 

Don't see why, they sure as hell won't file on anyone who will defend.

 

David

[AlITTleHelp:0)]

First letter my dad got was asking for £500, it then went up to £1000 and now it's down to £350. Surely if they were serious the amount would be going up?

[koollikedat]

Hi Guys,

 

Same as you all I'm being hassled by these idiots! I received a letter a little while back to which I sent a standard LOD. Subsequently today I have received another letter saying I have used a standard LOD and that they are disinclined to accept at face value what I have said in the LOD since it is a generic response even though that is more or less what I wanted to say to them in reply!

 

They then say that they are pursuing the matter further and increased the settlement from £500 to £600. The new offer sum i.e. £600 is indicated in the "WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COST NOTICE OF OFFER TO SETTLE - PART 36

 

Any advice on how I should revert back to them?

[babybear39]

Hiya,

 

My dad got his 3rd letter yesterday upuntil now he has ignored the matter, not sent any responses etc, i have this morning put together a lod, asking if they have any proof other than the IP to bring it forward, informing them i will charge £25 for every letter i have to deal with from them in a counter claim etc, i also got a little worked up when writing and put the following -

 

I write with reference to the above and the letters I have received from you with regards to ‘alleged copy write infringement’.

 

You should take this letter as formal notice that I deny all allegations made in your poorly put together ‘template’ letters, and will continue to deny and will not be paying any sum of money.

 

As I am sure you are aware having proof something is linked to my IP address is not conclusive evidence that I, or someone in my household downloaded the material, you admit as much in your letters!

 

I strongly deny breaching any part of the CDPA 1988 which you allege were breached using my connection. You may also like to note that section 16(2) requires me to have directly infringed copy write or to have authorised someone else to do so, none of which I have done, which is why you have no proof I did!

Never have I possessed a copy of the work referred to in your letters, nor have I distributed it or authorised anyone else to do so using my connection, if you have proof to the contrary (other that the ‘IP address’ rubbish that we both know would not stand up in court) then please feel free to make me aware of it!

 

Failing to not secure my wireless access is not a crime, and as you know, or should, having an unsecured router leaves it open for anyone to access, without my permission, to carry out any form of illegal activity. Again, if you have solid proof I, or a member of my household carried out the alleged act please bring the proof forward.

 

Any further letters you send to me will incur a £25 fee, this will be added to my counter claim Civil procedure rules (specifically section 52, rule 48.6) for harassment and being wrongly accused of something you have NO proof I committed, Please be informed that if you wish to pursue this matter, I will seek to recover all my costs to the maximum permitted by the Civil Procedure Rules.

 

You should also take note that this is not a template letter, therefore you have no reason to write to me again dismissing it as such, nor do you need to respond with more empty threats or accusations that I have simply used ‘help forums’, nor do I need to be informed of your ‘successful cases’ where you were awarded ‘£16,000’, we all know you have never won a case that was defended, you have merely won when the defendant failed to show up and contest in any way, you have simply won by default!

I will not fail to turn up should you be stupid enough to take this case to court and will take great pleasure in seeing it dismissed due to lack of evidence!

 

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Eould be grateful for any advice, if anyone thinks ive gone a little too far etc

 

I like

 

But you may want to ask a member of the site team to look it over before sending it.

[Time on my hands]

Firstly, I'm not surprised by this increase in letters - clearly following on from the man's recent boasts of forthcoming court cases, but also possibly influenced by escalaton of complaints to the SRA and an imminent appearance on Watchdog. Remember that he also recently went to court for another disclosure from ISPs via another Norwich Pharmacal order (no news yet on whether this was successful). Rumours are abounding as to whether he's wringing the last drops of cash from his current crop of victims before he starts afresh with a new lot.

 

Re the above letter - remember he's accusing you of uploading - not downloading.

 

Re the comments on BeingThreatened.com - they had their reasons for removing the link to this forum, which have already been listed, so I won't bother repeating them. To anyone questioning their motives - just remember where your LoD template originally came from!

[AlITTleHelp:0)]

The letter says DOWNLAODING, but ok then

[patrickq1]

the letter is a bit too tempermental...try something like this

 

Having already sent you two letters of denial, you have chosen to ignore. and have continued to use threatening letters demanding monies , counter claim Civil procedure rules (specifically section 52, rule 48.6 (PRACTICE DIRECTION ABOUT COSTS - Ministry of Justice)) for harassment and being wrongly accused of something you have NO proof I committed, Please be informed that if you wish to pursue this matter, I will seek to recover all my costs to the maximum permitted by the Civil Procedure Rules. also to read correctly you have withdrawn the previous offer which was a catch all by use of trickery offer , I can only suggest you now continue with your threat of COURT ACTION With this in mind I am disinclined to accept at face value what has been said, It seems your letter is VERY SIMMILLAR or the same as one that has been mentioned on the internet and as such is a template letter. it is simply a generic response. In the absence of anything more meaningful to consider, my stance remains unaltered and “I will not respond to any further attempts at intimidation” and it shall now be considered just that, intimidation and demanding money with menaces. In the meantime “I expressly reserve all of my rights" We shall await COURT ACTIONthinkbroadband :: TalkTalk campaign against government plans to disconnect file sharers

and in addition to this letter ..

Edited October 22, 2009 by patrickq1

[cashins]

Same as you all I'm being hassled by these idiots! I received a letter a little while back to which I sent a standard LOD. Subsequently today I have received another letter saying I have used a standard LOD and that they are disinclined to accept at face value what I have said in the LOD since it is a generic response even though that is more or less what I wanted to say to them in reply!

 

They then say that they are pursuing the matter further and increased the settlement from £500 to £600. The new offer sum i.e. £600 is indicated in the "WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COST NOTICE OF OFFER TO SETTLE - PART 36

 

Any advice on how I should revert back to them?

 

 

Don't see that you do need to revert back to them.

 

People seem to have got into a 'deny me thrice' syndrome with these people.

 

If you have sent an LOD, it matters not a jot if they say they don't accept it.

 

David

[andydd]

The letter says DOWNLAODING, but ok then

 

Odd..because from what I've read, ACS's arguement is that you 'made available' (i.e you had a certain file sitting in your torrent program) a file to many others thus breaching copyright rules. This file could of been downloaded by you or just a CD that you ripped and placed in the torrent folder, thus making it available to evryone.

 

What they are saying is that you in effect gave away a song or program to (potentially) thousands of others for free, hence the large sum they are asking for.

 

If it was simply accusing you of stealing or downloading one song, the actual value of that would be about £1.

 

I could easily 'open up' my collection of 1000's of songs and films to the entire torrent community and provide 10000's of downloads, but I wouldnt of personally downloaded anything

 

Andy

[ccsnet]

Just to throw in to the mix today.....

 

thinkbroadband :: TalkTalk campaign against government plans to disconnect file sharers

 

A survey commissioned by TalkTalk has found that 5% of wireless networks are open, without any security to restrict its use to authorised users. The survey was conducted on 11 October found 41% of a total of over 1,000 wireless networks were 'vulnerable to unauthorised use', mostly due to use of deprecated (obsolete) WEP encryption rather than the stronger WPA or WPA2 type. TalkTalk suggest that on this basis, over 7 million wireless networks could be vulnerable across the UK.

 

It also warned that 56% used WPA, which it suggested could become "hackable soon" due to a vulnerability which has been detected. In particular, only 3% of users used the WPA2 level of encryption which is recommended.

 

TalkTalk have carried out this research to illustrate the problems of government proposals on disconnecting those found to be downloading music without a legal right to do so, suggesting that it was possible for those looking to download unlawful content could just use others' connections, landing them in trouble instead. The company has launched a 'Don't Disconnect Us' campaign attacking the government's policy.

 

It by-passes the courts and gives rightsholders quasi-judicial powers

It exposes millions of people to false prosecution since it is based on an approach where those suspected of illegal filesharing will be presumed guilty and have to prove their innocence in order to avoid being falsely disconnected

It will do little to tackle illegal filesharing since the main offenders will easily avoid detection by using other people's broadband connections to download content or encrypting their activity. Indeed the proposed measures will increase Wi-Fi and PC hijacking and so increase even further the chances of innocent customers being wrongly cut off.

TalkTalk's three principle objections to the government plans to disconnect unlawful file sharers

PS I wonder if the postal strike has any affect on the 14 days

 

Terran

[ccsnet]

Odd..because from what I've read, ACS's arguement is that you 'made available' (i.e you had a certain file sitting in your torrent program) a file to many others thus breaching copyright rules. This file could of been downloaded by you or just a CD that you ripped and placed in the torrent folder, thus making it available to evryone.

Every one they are currently chasing for £500 that is..... cause they know who we are aledgadly

 

Ok - T/C but my point is shoulnt it be in that case 1 court case with multiple defendants ?

 

Terran

[AlITTleHelp:0)]

Odd hey? Have you acctually recieved a letter yourself or are you simply going on things you read on sites such as this?

[mr.ton]

Just had some good advice today NOT OFFICIAL from a ex citizens advice employer he told me if there is any one on low income ie income support and they do get sued they only have to pay what they can afford i have worked my money out and have 76p left over a month. LOOKS like they have got a long wait for my damages, and i owen nothink apart from my dog and cat.

 

This is why i say that ACS are simply wasting their time taking anyone to court for money.

If ACS think that they will just turn up & get given £600 in an instant, then they are very much deluded.

The court system will only make you pay what you can afford after all outgoings are catered for.

If thats a £1 per month then so be it, or if there is nothing leftover - a suspended judgement.

[n11186]

Just called into a local solicitors to day to make an apointment to see if i qualifie for legal aid, and if i get it im 1000% taking action against ACS, my wife is now in a mess with depression brought on by ACS false accuations. The receptionist also says there has been a few people in b4me for the same download. I asked her what advice did the solicitor give them she says i carnt give info on other peoples cases, but i can tell you there was a lot of laughter going on inside the solicitors room, and they came out looking happy :grin:

[andydd]

Odd hey? Have you acctually recieved a letter yourself or are you simply going on things you read on sites such as this?

 

No letter received by me, but have been following this (and other sites) with much interest.

 

Andy

[car2403]

This is why i say that ACS are simply wasting their time taking anyone to court for money.

If ACS think that they will just turn up & get given £600 in an instant, then they are very much deluded.

The court system will only make you pay what you can afford after all outgoings are catered for.

If thats a £1 per month then so be it, or if there is nothing leftover - a suspended judgement.

 

Yes, but the issue being that they are relying on 99% of people not knowing their A from their E when it comes to defending a Court claim and that they will get Judgment by Default without the need to fight at all, which is just wrong. If that happens, there'll need to be a fight to set Judgment aside to challenge the claim.

 

Just as well everyone reading this is within the 1% of folks that know their rights (or will do, after reading this thread) and won't be in that position, then, isn't it.

[miss mardy]

min was saying scooter aswell

[andydd]

min was saying scooter aswell

 

Yay !.Throw ya hands in the air if you love Scooter !

[car2403]

Yay !.Throw ya hands in the air if you love Scooter !

 

[[Car, caught with his hands in the air, then, realising what has happened, decides to blame someone else for putting them up there]]

 

I haven't had a letter, yet, though, ACS? I feel left out. For your records, my IP address is NO.TA.DO.WN.LO.AD.ER.SO.YO.UH.AV.EN.O.CH.AN.CE

 

[miss mardy]

[[Car, caught with his hands in the air, then, realising what has happened, decides to blame someone else for putting them up there]]

 

I haven't had a letter, yet, though, ACS? I feel left out. For your records, my IP address is NO.TA.DO.WN.LO.AD.ER.SO.YO.UH.AV.EN.O.CH.AN.CE

 

 

lol i love it ha ha :lol:

[car2403]

lol i love it ha ha :lol:

 

That is good for me at that time in the morning, actually, I agree

[halfords]

Hi All,

 

got my 3rd letter from ACS and same as every one else went from £500 to £600 now £350. wish i was a legal back ground and could do a counter claim against this clown. complained again to SRA (strongly) and got no answer from them!!

 

Surely someone could sue this outfit and close it down,

[Wintord]

If I remember rightly and I might not have, But I think someone did take it to court when it was DL running this crap, They did win the case, but the problem is it cost him a fortune in doing so.

[andydd]

If I remember rightly and I might not have, But I think someone did take it to court when it was DL running this crap, They did win the case, but the problem is it cost him a fortune in doing so.

 

It would of been DL taking someone to court, not the other way round and the losing side would have paid the costs surely ?

[mr.ton]

Yes..i would imagine they are still repaying it all now at a rate of £1 per month